There are many many proposals to augment GHC (and Haskell) that would be valuable yet languish because they have not be documented / collected anywhere aside from persisting in the Mailing lists.

There are many many proposals to augment GHC (and Haskell) that would be valuable yet languish because they have not be documented / collected anywhere aside from persisting in the Mailing lists.

+

+

Such proposals are things, typically, that would be uncontroversial and welcomed, but which no core GHC developers have free cycles to work on.

Proposals are suitable for this page if they do not require deep changes to GHC, though they may still be nontrivial, and which ghc-hq is likely to merge in when there is a strong community consensus and well-written patch is on hand.

Proposals are suitable for this page if they do not require deep changes to GHC, though they may still be nontrivial, and which ghc-hq is likely to merge in when there is a strong community consensus and well-written patch is on hand.

+

Many but not all of these may be associated with feature request tickets on the ghc trac: http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/query?status=new&status=assigned&status=reopened&type=feature+request&order=priority

+

Many tickets tracked by SPJ also fall in this category: http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/Status/SLPJ-Tickets

+

+

+

== Expanded Deprecated Pragma ==

+

The current pragma can attach to modules or top level entities including functions, classes, and types.

+

+

It cannot attach to exports (i.e. if we wish to not deprecate "foo" but only its reexport from module Bar).

+

+

It also cannot attach to methods within classes.

+

+

There are other possible things we may wish to deprecate as well. Expanding this pragma would make certain changes to libraries more tractable and easily managed.

+

+

http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/4879

+

+

Perhaps there is a framework to be designed for the following ad-hoc warnings as well: http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/8004

== Records and Modules ==

== Records and Modules ==

−

Yitzchak Gale's nested modules proposal http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/glasgow-haskell-users/2012-January/021591.html which would address one of the larger warts with the current module system and records while adding essentially no complexity to the GHC internals. (ie no changes would be needed to GHC beyond the parsing phase possibly, so an ''easy'' chagne to experiment with )

+

Yitzchak Gale's nested modules proposal l which would address one of the larger warts with the current module system and records while adding essentially no complexity to the GHC internals. (i.e. no changes would be needed to GHC beyond the parsing phase possibly, so an ''easy'' changeto experiment with )

Template Haskell spits out a lot of module loading text by default. Clearance has been given to increase the verbosity threshold for this to -v2, but someone needs to implement it. See:

+

+

http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/7863

+

+

== Qualified Module Exports ==

+

+

http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/8043

+

+

[[Category:Proposals]]

+

[[Category:GHC]]

+

[[Category:Community]]

Revision as of 23:15, 15 July 2013

There are many many proposals to augment GHC (and Haskell) that would be valuable yet languish because they have not be documented / collected anywhere aside from persisting in the Mailing lists.

Such proposals are things, typically, that would be uncontroversial and welcomed, but which no core GHC developers have free cycles to work on.

Proposals are suitable for this page if they do not require deep changes to GHC, though they may still be nontrivial, and which ghc-hq is likely to merge in when there is a strong community consensus and well-written patch is on hand.

2 Records and Modules

Yitzchak Gale's nested modules proposal l which would address one of the larger warts with the current module system and records while adding essentially no complexity to the GHC internals. (i.e. no changes would be needed to GHC beyond the parsing phase possibly, so an easy changeto experiment with )